OTTAWA—The cancellation of the Energy East oil pipeline proposal was alternately celebrated and lamented across the country on Thursday, with Prime Minister Justin Trudeau side-stepping criticism by calling the move a “business decision” that was made in light of dropping oil prices.

TransCanada, the company behind the $15.7-billion project, announced early in the day that it would pull the plug on its application to build a massive, 4,500-kilometre pipeline from the Alberta oilsands to refineries in Quebec and New Brunswick. It would have carried 1.1 billion barrels of crude oil across the country each day and created 14,000 jobs, according to TransCanada.

The Calgary-based company is also dropping its Eastern Mainline bid, which would have built up to 370 kilometres of natural gas pipeline from Markham to South Dundas in eastern Ontario.

The move comes after TransCanada asked for a 30-day suspension of its Energy East and Eastern Mainline applications on Sept. 7, stating that “recent changes” to the way the National Energy Board (NEB) will review its applications — notably by considering the greenhouse gas emissions of removing, transporting and then burning the fuel that the lines would carry — prompted the company to re-evaluate.

The NEB also brought in new judges and rebooted its review of the Energy East application in January, after an investigation by the National Observer revealed that the previous members of its review panel had met in secret with former Quebec Premier Jean Charest, who was a consultant for TransCanada at the time.

The Energy East project was to build a 4,500-km pipeline from the Alberta oilsands to refineries in Quebec and New Brunswick. (Jeff McIntosh / THE CANADIAN PRESS file photo)

Reaction to Thursday’s announcement was swift, with voices across the country both denouncing the federal government’s regulatory scheme and cheering the demise of a hotly contested pipeline project.

Alberta Premier Rachel Notley said in a statement that she was “deeply disappointed” in the decision, while Montreal Mayor Denis Coderre declared “victory” and hailed the demise of the proposal, which many argued was too dangerous for the environment.

Article Continued Below

On Parliament Hill, the Conservative opposition used question period to pepper the government with attacks over the proposed pipeline cancellation. Trudeau dodged blame for the decision that Conservative MP Lisa Raitt directed at the prime minister, and instead framed TransCanada’s decision to cancel its pipeline approvals as a response to dropping oil prices.

In October 2014, when TransCanada officially proposed Energy East to the NEB, the West Texas Intermediate price of crude oil was $83.27 (U.S.) per barrel. It is now roughly $50 (U.S.) per barrel.

“It’s obvious that market conditions have changed,” Trudeau said.

Earlier in the day, Raitt told reporters outside the House of Commons that it was a “terrible day” for workers in the energy sector. She blamed the Trudeau government for creating environmental regulations that destroyed the business-case for the TransCanada projects.

“Today is a result of the disastrous energy policies promoted by Justin Trudeau, and his failure to champion the Canadian energy sector,” Raitt said.

She also claimed the Liberal decision to include estimated greenhouse gas emissions in how it decides whether to approve infrastructure projects has placed Canadian energy companies at a disadvantage compared to “foreign oil companies and foreign dictators” in countries like Saudi Arabia and Venezuela.

“(Trudeau) forced Canadian oil companies to comply with standards that are not required for foreign companies,” she said. “Everything that Justin Trudeau touches becomes a nightmare.”

Natural Resources Minister Jim Carr dismissed the Conservatives’ claims, and said Raitt’s logic would mean Canada should take part in a regulatory “race to the bottom” with foreign countries. Like Trudeau, he described the Energy East cancellation as a “business decision,” and said it is not his job to explain why a private company dropped its proposal.

He added that the government calculus to green-light energy projects — which was announced in January 2016 and includes reviews of economic benefits, environmental risks and consultations with Indigenous peoples — doesn’t mean no new pipelines will be built in Canada.

“We would have used the same process to evaluate the Energy East pipeline project that saw the Trans Mountain expansion and Line 3 projects approved,” he said.

“Nothing has changed in the government’s decision-making process. Canada is open for business.”

The Liberals promised during the 2015 election to overhaul the regulatory regime that decides whether energy projects such as pipelines should be approved.

At the same time, the Trudeau government has argued that Canada needs to transition away from the use of fossil fuels and invest in renewable energy while combating climate change. The Liberals have vowed to phase out coal-fired energy, enact regulations to reduce methane emissions and institute carbon pricing across the country so that each ton of greenhouse gas emissions will be taxed an equivalent of $50 by 2022.

Canada’s goal under the global Paris climate accord is to cut emissions to 30 per cent below their 2005 level by 2030 — a target annual output of 523 megatonnes.

Andrea Harden-Donahue, energy and climate campaigner with the Council of Canadians, said the Energy East cancellation shows that large-scale pipeline projects are becoming untenable, as tougher environmental rules are implemented, the price of oil remains low and the nascent renewable energy sector continues to grow.

“Big oil is starting to see the writing on the wall,” she said. “These types of projects just don’t make sense anymore.”

She added that a spill from Energy East could have jeopardized the drinking water of millions of Canadians, and that the estimated emissions of the project were significant.

A Pembina Institute report from 2014 estimated Energy East would create at least 32 megatons of greenhouse gas emissions each year — more than the Keystone XL project that would carry oil from Alberta to the southern United States.

Patrick DeRochie, climate and energy program manager with Environmental Defence, said the cancellation should be an indication that it’s time to start rolling back investment in the development of oil production in Canada.

“New tarsands pipelines don’t make sense either economically or environmentally in a world that is clearly adjusting to climate change and moving away from fossil fuels,” he said.

On the other side of the debate, Perrin Beatty, the president of the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, said in a statement that the cancellation was a “grave disappointment” because Energy East would have created thousands of jobs.

His statement said that Thursday’s announcement, combined with the court challenges of the Trans Mountain expansion in B.C. and the province’s cancelled NorthWest natural gas project, can be blamed on Canada’s “convoluted” regulatory framework.

“This cancellation must serve as a call to the government to improve and streamline its approval process in a way that provides greater clarity for companies wishing to invest and operate in Canada,” Beatty said.